I'm a 19 year old college student, and I just wanted to say that I find it extremely interesting what you guys are posting.

However (and should this come as a suprise?) I have to disagree with a majority of what most of you have been saying.

Martin Luther King, Jr. was a flawed man. Of course. But so was Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and our own President George W. Bush. Nixon was an incredible liar and racist, especially against recent immigrants to our Nation--such as Filipinos and other Asians, and Hispanics.

And even if Martin Luther King, Jr. was an evil man, his practices, as I stand, were not. Of course, there will be the majority of people here who strongly disagree with that.

All I'm saying is you cannot discredit his entire work based on isolated events. If you do, you'd have to discredit the "founding" fathers of America, based on their lack of ethical and humane practices, especially in dealing with Native Americans and Africans.

And sweet Doug--why so rash? I am sure you'd like to be thought of as an intelligent (white) human being, yet your posts come off as uneducated nonsense. You sound like a three year old arguing with himself. Case in point: "I don't see a monkey in the mirror..."

I'm a 19 year old college student, and I just wanted to say that I find it extremely interesting what you guys are posting.

However (and should this come as a suprise?) I have to disagree with a majority of what most of you have been saying.

That is what this section of the board is for, to disagree and have the freedom to express it. We don't enjoy that luxury in the majority of mainstream media.

Quote:

Martin Luther King, Jr. was a flawed man. Of course. But so was Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and our own President George W. Bush. Nixon was an incredible liar and racist, especially against recent immigrants to our Nation--such as Filipinos and other Asians, and Hispanics.

This forum isn't about pointing out the flaws of a normal man. This forum is about pointing out the ludicrous agenda involving the forced and induced national extolling of a man who patently had an agenda. An agenda that clashed with traditional American values and what made it what it used to be when it was a great nation. The precedence this man was given over the founding fathers is pure blasphemy to say the least.

Quote:

And even if Martin Luther King, Jr. was an evil man, his practices, as I stand, were not. Of course, there will be the majority of people here who strongly disagree with that.

His agenda, since its being implimented, has had a major role in the destruction of the black family structure for instance, and, with the exception of a small percentage of Affirmative Action benefactors, has had nothing but a negative effect on both the black collective and the country in general. One example I can think of right now is that before the Civil Rights Movement of the 60's, the number one killer of young black males wasn't young black males.

But what concerns me the most personally is the unleashing of the black crimminal upon my race and the fact that it will only get worse as the black percentage of the population increases. His idealogy was also instrumental in that occurance too.

Quote:

All I'm saying is you cannot discredit his entire work based on isolated events. If you do, you'd have to discredit the "founding" fathers of America, based on their lack of ethical and humane practices, especially in dealing with Native Americans and Africans.

If you will look around, you will see that the egalitarian agenda has done a pretty good job of discrediting the founding fathers. Not only have their names been concentrated into a generic "President's Day", but schools and other public buildings have for years been renamed in many areas due to pressure from certain left wing groups calling them "dead white men" along with a number of other strictures.

So as it stands now, this one black male is the only one who is bestowed the honor of having his birthday be a national holiday. To rescind that atrocity would be a step in the right direction towards true equal rights and self-determination rather than the liberal egalitarian version.

Not to mention, the truth is never a bad thing to reveal no matter who it concerns, don't you think?

Rick

__________________

"One life is all we have and we live it as we believe in living it. But to sacrifice what you are and to live without belief, that is a fate more terrible than dying." - Joan of Arc

Good friends will never be forgotten. You may lose them in body. But their spirit will always be within the hearts of those they touched. Goodbye for now my friend until we meet again in a better place.
RIP John Law
1955-2008

I'm a 19 year old college student, and I just wanted to say that I find it extremely interesting what you guys are posting.

However (and should this come as a suprise?) I have to disagree with a majority of what most of you have been saying.

Martin Luther King, Jr. was a flawed man. Of course. But so was Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and our own President George W. Bush. Nixon was an incredible liar and racist, especially against recent immigrants to our Nation--such as Filipinos and other Asians, and Hispanics.

And even if Martin Luther King, Jr. was an evil man, his practices, as I stand, were not. Of course, there will be the majority of people here who strongly disagree with that.

All I'm saying is you cannot discredit his entire work based on isolated events. If you do, you'd have to discredit the "founding" fathers of America, based on their lack of ethical and humane practices, especially in dealing with Native Americans and Africans.

And sweet Doug--why so rash? I am sure you'd like to be thought of as an intelligent (white) human being, yet your posts come off as uneducated nonsense. You sound like a three year old arguing with himself. Case in point: "I don't see a monkey in the mirror..."

You seem to be very-well indoctrinated indeed my young friend! Persevere, and when the NWO finally comes into fruition, who knows, maybe you'll be offered a position at the Bureau of Sensitivity Training, or, the even more prestigious, Dept. of Thought Police!

As far as Richard Nixon being an incredible liar and racist goes, do you know what famous D.W.M. (I'm sure you know that acronym) sanctioned the first - the "first" mind you - affirmative action laws to go into effect in the U.S.? Yo-o-u-u-u guessed it! Ol' Tricky-Dick himself! Civil Rights icon James Farmer says, Nixon, without a doubt, was the strongest president on lowering barriers for minorities up to that point. And if you're even thinking about implying that he was pressured into it by some left-wing, goody-two-shoes front, I suggest you dig back deeper into the man's past. You'll find he was a solid supporter all along of these "rights", dating back to his vice-presidency in the Eisenhower administration.

Personally, I despise the man - but apparently not for the same reasons as you. I despise him for "precisely" what he did in the above-mentioned paragraph.

Hmmph! Maybe you should have been weaned on "See Spot Run", instead of "Heather Has Two Mommies."

You seem to be very-well indoctrinated indeed my young friend! Persevere, and when the NWO finally comes into fruition, who knows, maybe you'll be offered a position at the Bureau of Sensitivity Training, or, the even more prestigious, Dept. of Thought Police!

As far as Richard Nixon being an incredible liar and racist goes, do you know what famous D.W.M. (I'm sure you know that acronym) sanctioned the first - the "first" mind you - affirmative action laws to go into effect in the U.S.? Yo-o-u-u-u guessed it! Ol' Tricky-Dick himself! Civil Rights icon James Farmer says, Nixon, without a doubt, was the strongest president on lowering barriers for minorities up to that point. And if you're even thinking about implying that he was pressured into it by some left-wing, goody-two-shoes front, I suggest you dig back deeper into the man's past. You'll find he was a solid supporter all along of these "rights", dating back to his vice-presidency in the Eisenhower administration.

Personally, I despise the man - but apparently not for the same reasons as you. I despise him for "precisely" what he did in the above-mentioned paragraph.

Hmmph! Maybe you should have been weaned on "See Spot Run", instead of "Heather Has Two Mommies."

Creating and supporting Affirmative Action does not discredit the fact that he was a liar and a racist. I'm saying that human beings are far more complex than that. I don't agree with what Martin Luther King, Jr. did in his private life, however he did so much for our nation. Just like I don't agree with what the "founding" fathers did in their private lives, I still respect the fact that they fought for freedom and helped in creating one of the most poweful nations in existence.

HoaxThis: As for Richard Nixon, I always thought that the first affirmative action statutes to go into existence were mainly for women,. Perhaps I am wrong. Would you care to elaborate? Thanks!

Long County Rebel: would you explain to me how Martin Luther King, Jr.'s practices helped to hurt the black family structure? Are you referring to his extramarital experiences, or of something else? (This is not a "smart aleck" comment, by the way, I'm truly interested in what you have to say)

Long County Rebel: would you explain to me how Martin Luther King, Jr.'s practices helped to hurt the black family structure? Are you referring to his extramarital experiences, or of something else? (This is not a "smart aleck" comment, by the way, I'm truly interested in what you have to say)

If I was being a bit esoteric forgive me. I was referring to King playing such a key role in the Civil Rights Movement in general and the ultimate effect that “movement” has had on the black family structure among many other aspects of social structure, from both sides of the spectrum.

Maybe a certain percentage of the black population made some economic gains as a result of King’s influence in the movement. But in the end, has the overall collective really made any gains? This man is extolled for his alleged influence in that movement. But look around you. Has society benefited from it?

As White control of this society relaxed and disintegrated thru black voting blocks and vote whore politicians, black crime has risen to astronomical levels, American schools had dropped from having some of the highest GPAs in the 50s to having some of the lowest in Western civilization today.

And along with all that, the black family structure disintegrated to the level it is now. I read once that more than 70 percent of black children are born illegitimate and the number one killer of young black males are; “young black males”.

I certainly know White America hasn’t benefited from the Civil Rights movement. A small percentage of white women who may benefit from certain Affirmative Action programs are insignificant and even more contributing to the degeneration of the white family structure. And all in all, with the unleashing of black criminal onto the white collective and the degeneration of urban areas and the subsequent “white flight” resulting, one group patently had to give up the basic freedoms of safe neighborhoods, safe and productive schools and self-determination in order for another to take a low road to more degeneration.

But if you see any benefit this movement that King played such a major role in to the black race, I would love to see the proof. I see proof of the opposite on a daily basis.

I would like to know why, after taking about 30 minutes last night to compose a (what I consider to be anyway) civil response to LaCernaKrasna's post (and she was expecting an answer) it was'nt posted. There was no profanity or ethnic slurs, no threats, or anything else a "victim" of our racist society could possibly be offended at, at least as far as I can see. I don't know - you guys offer a "sensitivity training" course somewhere around here? Maybe that's what I need. If you don't post this, I wish you would at least have the courtesy to pm or email me a line or two, telling me what was wrong with the post. This will be my last post. Later.

Martin Luther King, Jr. was a flawed man. Of course. But so was Thomas Jefferson, George Washington,

It wasn't Jefferson or Washington who preached to America that (quoted from his famous speech) "individuals should be judged, not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." (un-quote)

Well, we are doing exactly what the good doctor asked us to do. We are judging the content of his character.

Quote:

Nixon was an incredible liar and racist, especially against recent immigrants to our Nation--such as Filipinos and other Asians, and Hispanics.

Liars I have a problem with. Of course, I don't have a problem with racists, the real racialists more accurately rather than the ones in it for personal gain. The fact is, none of the whites you mentioned have their own federally mandated national holidays.

Quote:

And even if Martin Luther King, Jr. was an evil man, his practices, as I stand, were not.

This was just getting interesting and you seem to have bailed out. Come on back Mr. College student. Tell us why you think King's practices were so pure and ethnical considering the current state of affairs regarding the results of those practices.
Rick

It really does show you how much the blacks want unity and equality, that they are willing to discuss the murder and torture of innocent whites in their vengefull tribal musings. :chainsaw

White people have committed as many crimes as blacks have, so by merely putting some stories of blacks abusing whites on a website,it makes them look like savage killers. I can easily look up crimes that whites have committed and post them on a website, and make them look just as bad if not worse. But to be fair, and not start a controversey, I can also look for a million crimes hispanics, asians, jews, indians etc. have done and post them on a website, to make their race look bad. I don't think thats fair to show something so one sided,Just a thought, no need to respond.